Monday, March 22, 2010

SERFDOM, REVOLUTION, OR SOUTHERN INDEPENDENCE

As the boot of centralized fascist-socialist tyranny pushes harder on our necks, we have three choices: 1) serfdom; 2) revolution; or 3) Southern independence. I would hope those reading this would have already omitted option number one from consideration.

However, serfdom will likely be the choice of the majority of Americans (and maybe even of Southerners). Why? It is the easiest path. It requires one to do nothing out of the ordinary, to take no risks nor face any danger. Because most people like their bread and circuses and don’t want to be taken out of their comfortable day-to-day existence, they will chose serfdom and convince themselves it is the reasonable and even the patriotic thing to do. Others who might know better will choose this path because of fear.

The revolution option is infinitely better than serfdom, but it has its downside, too. Most revolutions, historically speaking, are bloody affairs that often, as it is said, “devour their own children.” Before you remind me of the successful American Revolution, please remember that that event was a secession movement against the British Empire and not a turning of the world upside down as was the French Revolution. Modern revolutions normally degenerate very quickly into chaos. Before you advocate letting the revolution genie out of her bottle, know this: the Feds may be inept at most things, but they have proven themselves expert at killing people and destroying things. Yes, it may have to come down to an armed stand off; however, there is a better way than out-and-out revolution that leads to this point.

I prefer option three: Southern independence. Our States are historically the loci of ultimate temporal sovereignty within our federated, constitutional republic. The Founders intended it to be that way. Any of the Southern States (or any of the fifty) can assert that sovereignty anytime it wishes by withdrawing from the voluntary union of the States united. By withdrawing (or seceding) through the action of its legislature or another body elected for that specific purpose, the State is on solid legal and moral ground. Our lesser magistrates would be doing exactly what they should to protect the lives, liberty, and property of the State’s citizens against the encroachment of tyranny.

A proper prelude to secession might be Nullification and Interposition. If the federal Congress, the President, or the federal courts (or any combination of the three) should commit unconstitutional acts against the States and the citizens thereof, a State could simply declare that action, be it a law, an executive order, or a legal ruling, to be of no effect within the State’s borders. Should the feds press the issue (which they likely would), then the State government (again, the lesser magistrate) would have the duty to interpose itself between its citizens and the federal forces arrayed against them. This might take the form of the mobilization of a true State Militia (not the National Guard, which can be “federalized”). This is why you should take the right to keep and bear arms seriously.

The use of Nullification and Interposition (and a subsequent secession) might, it is true, lead to armed conflict just as revolution would. However, the former would have the force of history and law on its side whereas the latter, though justifiable, would be more desultory, disorganized, and chaotic. I think it’s always better, at least for as long as possible, to have some lawful and time-honored precedents on your side.

Under present circumstances, brought upon us by both major political parties and our own lack of vigilance, I don’t see any other options but the three I’ve briefly outlined above. Because serfdom is out for most of those who will read this, we had better think long and hard about the other two options. We will have to choose one. I pray we choose wisely. Live well . . .